>> good morning. we are here to consider the budget requests for the fiscal year 2018. this is the second of three hearings halloween the -- following the hearing last week. back.ary zinke, welcome gives nice to be able to you the official tally this morning, make it officially official. i want to start by noting you have taken on top tasks including challenges that have gone unaddressed for years. i think you are off to a good start. i have enjoyed working with you. appreciated the opportunity to host you and some

members here on the committee here and alaska a couple of weeks ago. we had meetings in anchorage, we were on the north slope looking at our considerable potential up there. we attended a memorial day .eremony at fires lake it was an important and productive time. our hearing coincides with a big milestone for alaska. today is the 40th anniversary of first oil moving through our trans-alaska pipeline. our 800day in 1977, mile-long pipeline carried what is now more than 17 billion oils of oil -- barrels of southeast. while youopportunity are in alaska to be at the start of the pipeline, mile zero.

along with a couple of others. i believe you saw why alaskans say it is not just a pipeline, it is truly our economic lifeline. we wasted no time signing a secretary order helping us to fulfill that asset. the administration has requested a total of 11.7 billion dollars in discretionary appropriations for the department of the interior. overall that is a reduction from $1 billion in the current level, the administration's effort to shift funding. we are going to view all of iese cuts a very carefully, don't expect many to become a reality, especially those that target popular programs.

i will also say that the positives in my view outweigh the negatives. program we cannot support, there is another one that we can and i haven't been able to make that statement or a while now. a good example is in the administration's intent to -- for the gulf coast states. like most alaskans, i want to expand revenue sharing rather than ended. frankly, i don't see the puzzle going anywhere, but it is clear that the administration understands that we need to strengthen our energy security, because i see proposals for a new five-year leasing program, which hopefully will restore i have been asked a

couple of times in recent weeks why is now the right time to area, so i want to take a moment to explain why i feel this is so important. first of all, it is critical to understand that we are talking about a part that congress set aside for oil and gas exploration. governmente federal recommended it be opened for that purpose. wherewe are at a place alaska -- we have the highest unemployment rate in the country right now. we need more jobs. we have a dire state budget, we need more revenue. with global revenues falling, but global demand set to increase, we know the world will need more oil yard by developing 001 of the refuge, an

area roughly the size of south carolina, we can create those new jobs, bring energy online right when we needed to strengthen our security, strengthen our competitiveness. and this is something that most alaskans strongly support, more than 70%. i also appreciate the administration taking a on aructive approach potential royalty for hard rock minerals. i will be interested to take a look at the study, doi is now conducting. be to do noal must harm, and that is exactly what i see here. the administration's proposal to good sign.s another piltould note that

should be mandatory. so again, while i don't agree with everything in this request, it is better than what we have seen in recent years. it does not rely on budget gimmicks. it focuses on taking care of the lands, the federal government already owns, rather than continuing to buy more. and it will help western states increase the production of our natural resources. again, secretary zinke, i thank you for being here. i thank you for taking steps to restore alaska's trust. are reviewingg we the president's proposed by that for the department of the interior. overall, president trump is .roposing to cut funding by .1%

this budget would be devastating to our national parks, refuges, and other lands. trust to native tribes. unfortunately, these priorities put the interest of the fossil fuel industry of ahead of the public land interest by funding for -- and cuts all other priorities. intends to --tion let me run through the low lights appeared this budget would cut $400 million from the park service budget. it would result in cutting more than 1000 full-time employees. department'sthe own map, nearly 90% of the parks would reduce their current staffing levels reducing services to the public.

uses the zinke also budget to obscure the fact that it is cutting a water conservation project by 81%. this is our most successful land conservation program. suffice it to say, this budget would pump the rakes on a booming outdoor recreation favor ofll in industries having trouble competing in today's marketplace. meanwhile, the u.s. geological $163y would be cut by million. we are talking about water and climate science. we are also talking about work on national hazards that are vital to the public. secretary zinke's proposal would also cut 11% from in already woefully underfunded bureau of indian affairs.

these cuts would reduce funding for tribal education programs and social services. this is unexpected will -- unacceptable/ theould not be surprised administration is proposing -- it has been attempted by every republican president since the 1980's. i know this will be something we will have continued discussion on, but i think it is also important, that it is the first time that secretary zinke is in front of the committee that we raise other issues. colleagues and i are particularly concerned about the outrage in the state of washington, but it is also clear there are many other areas. it took the trump administration less than 100 days to launch a war on 111 years of a bipartisan land conservation.

bears years national monument in particular, trying to roll back waste,ars is a taxpayer especially at a time when the administration is opposing significant staff cutbacks. secretary zinke's ears is anh bears upfront to tribes. i think any attempt to undermine the protection of bears ears is illegal and i will strongly oppose any attempt. administration's is attempting to unilaterally suspend rules that have already gone into effect on the blm

methane role. last week, there was an attempt to suspend the methane role. ruleis a common sense designed to prevent waste of natural gas. that myple understand colleagues in the senate voted on this recently, but instead of following what the united states senate has said to be done, the department is trying to abandon hundreds of pages of environmental analysis. my colleague, senator udall: and i are sending you a memo today saying you must follow administrative procedures. this and make up your own regulation without due process. clearly we have a lot to discuss today. hearing therd to secretary's statements, but our public lands will be defended and we will have an open

discussion about our path forward. >> thank you. we are joined again by the secretary of interior, the honorable ryan zinke. he is also joined by olivia the f star -- who is --ferriter. to colleagues that we are scheduled to have two votes commencing at 11:00. it is my intent to keep the committee moving. you may want to figure out when yourre up next and time

floor. go to the it is my understanding we have to conclude at noon. secretary zinke, you would like to present the budget proposal, welcome. sec. zinke: thank you. it is a high honor to be here today and testify in support of the budget for the department of interior. i do intend to request to submit my entire statement for the record. this is what a balanced budget looks like. there are tough decisions throughout, but if we want to balance of budget, this is a starting point of what a look like.dget would there hasn't been one around for a while. i fully understand my stewardship responsibilities, because interior touches the lives of more americans than any other department.

i take that responsibility very seriously. president's budget proposes $11.7 billion and saves the taxpayer dollars about $1.6 billion. we make a strategic investments to make sure that energy and national security, and to address the core responsibilities that lie within the department. the budget prioritizes all of the above energy strategy, it oil, gas, coal, over any other strategy, but we also think it is necessary to have a focus on boosting revenue toough legislative proposals the tune of $5.8 billion. in 2008, the department of revenue made about $18 billion a year in offshore alone. second to our friends, the irs. last year, our revenue was $2.6

billion. that is a drop of $15.5 billion a year in revenue. when we talk about areastructure, the parks about 11 point five billion dollars behind, which represents 73% of our total gap in maintenance and repair. we would have made up that in scale in one year with the amount of revenue we dropped. so, i will be looking at revenue. one of my first task was a secretary order, and thanks to the ranking member, i did look at revenues across the board and look at royalties, rents, all of the above giving no quarter to gas, oil, wind. if you are going to operate on public land, then the public should have a say, because we are all stewards of our public lands and we want to make sure we have a fair return.

the return should be transparent, and it should be trust, but verify. just that, look at our revenues across the field on public land. when it comes to infrastructure, what is removed from the budget proposal is acquisition of a new land. an $11.5 billion deficit, the priority must need to take care of what we have. our ability to maintain, i invite you to go up and look at arlington. arlington is a national disgrace, i'm talking about the home.ng up on top, lee's through neglect, the shutters are nearly falling off. disrepair, ite in

is a national disgrace. i invite you to take a look at it, because we have to take care of what we own. budget calls for a $35 million increase for a total of $76 million in part infrastructure. this includes $18 million for the first stage of repairing the arlington memorial bridge. our backlog in the parks, about half are roads. about one third of those roads are outside our parks. there is a $260 million bill on memorial bridge. access, gateway roads, outside of what most americans would be a park responsibility. time in years, payment in lieu of taxes is part of the discretionary budget.

last year it was part of a mandatory budget that did not pass and it was zero. million and is 397 the reduction is about the same as the other programs, but it is in the budget. we fully fund fire suppression at a 10 year average. firesng forest particularly in the west has become a billion-dollar problem. growing up in the west, investing and making sure we remove dead and dying trees is a prudent expense. we also support indian trust responsibilities, with a core focus on self governments, self determination, and sovereignty. we found savings by reducing federal land acquisition, eliminating redundant programs, and allowing states, local communities, and private partners to take the lead on some others.

at the end of the day, this is what a balanced budget looks like. there are tough decisions, i fully understand the responsibility of the executives -- as well as the responsibility of congress. congress gets a say, and i am glad to be here with you today to go through that. i understand you have a responsibility to each of your states, and i will work with you to make sure we have a budget that represents a great nation. world-classa experience on public lands that delivers savings to taxpayers, encouraging responsible energy development, or reorganizing my workforce here it i'm thrilled to be with you today, and i look forward to your questions and working together. thank you. let me start off by bringing up

an issue we had had some discussion on both here in committee and off committee. this is as it relates to transfer of federal lands to states. you have often said you do not support that, but you have also acknowledged that alaska is unique. it has some distinctions, and i appreciate that. when we look to alaska lands and what was granted at statehood, the right to acquire more than 104 million acres of land, roughly equal to the size of the state of california, natives were also granted lands to settle aboriginal claims. today the interior department through the blm effectively acts as a real estate agent to accomplish these land transfers. blm still needs to decide the

-- acres, still needs to review average before the passage can continue. 9.6 million acres are under adjudication. my a calix, this is a lots of land that is yet to be conveyed. we have been a state for over 50 years, my promises -- the promises made to alaskan people were made over 40 years ago. i have pushedg through successive administrations, and want to make sure we are on the same page here when it comes to land transfers in alaska. i would ask whether you agree that the interior department has a role and obligation to convey federal lands to alaska and to

our alaskan native people. thank you, madam. alaska is different. about therned surveying process, it is too long. working on technology and agree how to use technology to get it done. sen. murkowski: that still remains a little bit of a rub, but i appreciate you were updated on that on your visit to alaska. sec. zinke: i would like to work with you, there are surveys in the intermediate process, i do not know why we cannot go forward and view those as final and get those moving. you have a veteran issue. they were either not informed or did not take action, and how to provide their right on land.

there are multiple ways for, but we need to get it done. i will commit to work with you and get it done. forward is best path the conveyance to agree and put a time frame on it, and sit down and look at the best technology in order to get it done. a 98% solution today is better than a 100% solution in 15 years from now. together, i think we can get this done and quickly, certainly the ones done on the intermediate. i think we should propose to move to final and get that section done. sen. murkowski: noted this is something we need to be working on, but again, these allotments to our alaskan native veterans, those lands to those who are termed the landless natives,

there is so much that is yet unfulfilled in terms of promises people ofd to the alaska and our native people. we need to be working to advance them. you signedry order when you are up and that state to increase energy production, again, relevant today, do you have any update for me on the implementation of that order including the revised activity and where you are with implementation of that order? get theke: i will specifics on it, but i wanted to 2 specifically,-0 that was set aside to assess. and my responsibility is to do just that, to assess. i don't have the authority to authorize production. that authority lies within congress.

my response ability is to make sure assess. our publicard of land, i think it is important to inventory is. forwardt is move actively. the 1002 was set aside to do just that. sen. murkowski: thank you. we look forward to it. i will work with you on getting an update on the other aspects of the plan. cantwell:ntwell? sen. thank you for being here. my state is home to two national parks, and your proposal would cut both parks about 7%.

ofmpic would see a reduction $900,000. i am trying to understand these parks were already underfunded, and the cuts will only make the problem worse. can you explain why you think cutting these parts and park in the right strategy and balancing a budget? sec. zinke: infrastructure increased $38 million. that is not a cut. been secretary, i have been to maine, new utah, montana, alaska, connecticut. i have toured monuments and it is clear that the front line is

too thin. my assessment is we have too many middle management and above, and too few in the parks. we are looking at going through a process how to push more assets to frontline. measurest cutting previous to this is always a regionalized assess up, and we find ourselves too short where we needed in the parks. we need more scientists in the field and less lawyers, but also we are too heavy in the regions and that has taken a toll at our parks. the best funds for parks are through the door. charge our parks did not visitors last year, and we tier system, and

many don't follow the tier system. we have to look at revenue, and public-private partnerships. if you go to yosemite, the experience is now going up the freeway. public-private partnerships, how to move people and maintain the experience in the park is important and we are looking at everything. mr. secretary, i find the budget so focused on natural gas aspect of a revenue, i think you are neglecting the fact that the generate $124 billion to the government.

that versus the $2 billion you are talking about, or $18 billion for oil and gas, i want to make sure we are putting when it comesetal to opportunities. that will generate a lot more revenue for us as government. i wanted to ask you about the believeane role, do you you were responsible with complying with the administrative procedures act? enteredke: i am and we into the record the notification, and we are following and compliant with the law. sen. cantwell: do think the notice is important to reviewing the regulations? reviewing the are methane, as you know there was a cra that came close to one vote on it. sen. cantwell: does that mean you are free to do what you want because it came close? the role stands, right?

sec. zinke: that is not what i said, ma'am. my position on methane, i think it is a waste. we agree that flaring is a waste. we are looking to make sure we can provide incentives to capture it, because as a steward of your public lands, i think layering it is a waste. we have to make sure we incentivize capture systems and make sure our isolated assets can connect, and make sure the taxpayer is getting a fair valuation on our look holdings. pres. reagan: my question to you is -- sen. cantwell: my question is do you have to adhere to the administrative procedures act? sec. zinke: we provided public notice, and it is now open as it sits right now, and we entered

into the register the procedure to begin to change the role. that is within the law. >> so you're going to have a periodnotice and comment ? sec. zinke: of course, i follow the law. >> thank you for being with us, we appreciate it. comments, you mentioned the advantage you had growing up in the west and understanding the importance of appropriate measures for fire suppression, well worth i think the billion dollars or so that you are putting forward, and i complement you for that, what i bring up is my advantage of growing up on the gulf coast and a lead-in into that. -- obviously the budget states the administration

proposes to appeal the revenue-sharing payments to ensure these sale of public resources from federal waters owned by all americans benefit all americans. as you know, beginning in 2018, oil and gas revenues are set to increase to $375 million with an additional $125 million being distributed to the stateside conservation fund. laws in louisiana, these funds are required to put in conservation. treesove dead and dying -- the justify the money for fire suppression. i guess the point i would make is that a rodent approach to rebuild the gulf coast coastline -- prudent approach to rebuild the gulf coast coastline.

the federal role in this, our coastline began to erode when the mississippi river was dammed , if you will, levied, for the benefit of commerce. all of the ports up and down the mississippi benefit because our land is levied. and since the year the levee began, our coastline has begun to proceed. the penalty for that is borne entirely environmentally back our state. that is where i would see the federal obligation. let me show you, since i land, the the money we received has to be used for the master plan. this is our master plan, 120

projects creating 182 miles of land. the green space is where land will be produced. when hurricanes come to northlands, every mile of wetland lost allows the storm stronger, much creating obligation for the -- forn taxpayer or that that as we saw with katrina. if we don't have dollars, this cannot happen. you mentioned you went to congressman sculley's -- scalise's offshore energy visits. we mention our coastline, we are the energy coast for our state. this is what is going to happen if we don't take action. if we don't have the revenue to rebuild our coastline, this is the high end scenario 50 years

from now. red is the land that is lost. if we have it, this is a future scenario. that is the worst, this is medium. even medium, we can see an toredible vulnerability here buffers storms hitting our coast. then i can just kind of go -- sos is all energy coastline, our nation depends upon the refineries and pipelines here. gas rises in the northeast when our businesses are put out a storm. you mentioned desiring to be energy secure, that depends upon offshore revenue and development, but also depends on

the pipeline refineries to take the oil and gas. irst question, how does removing those lines -- funds address energy security? i will point out that if we expand revenue-sharing off of alaska and the atlantic coast, tose states are incentivized purchase paid in by sharing revenue, we will increase revenues for the nation as well as the state and increase the number of good paying jobs with more people paying taxes out of good paying jobs. my question is would you support revenue-sharing to the atlantic states, alaska, and the rest of the -- if these were figured into the plan? sec. zinke: thank you for your question.

i know more about red snapper then i ever cared to sitting next to congressman graves. i understand exactly what you are talking about on this, and the budget does take the tack -- and this is the first step of what a balanced budget would look like, but the budget before you looks like a balanced budget in 10 years and where the revenue comes from. the position of this budget is the revenue goes into treasury. clearly the position of louisiana is that, that is inappropriate. i understand exactly the differences on it. what i can say is i will work with you on it, certainly. i understand the importance of louisiana. thehink that taking 94% of offshore assets offline has had a significant detriment to

revenue of interior, and when you have a lot of money, the choices become easier, but when yearrop $15.5 billion per of revenue, much of it offshore, much of it from the gulf, some from alaska and other holdings, it has a significant -- creates a significant issue on funding. i will work with you on that and will be glad to. sen. cassidy: thank you. >> senator franken? just one note on climate and sea level rise, i think there is a relationship. zinke, during your confirmation hearing, you assured members of this committee that you took the tribal confirmation and sovereignty very seriously, but i have to say what i have heard from tribal nations so far is

not promising. when it comes to the department of the interior's status review of the bears ears national monument, you said the tribes with yourhappy" recommendations, but this isn't the case. which ittion, represents the five local sovereign nations, has been clear in its unanimous position to keep the national monument as it is. it has condemned your recent recommendations stating "the radical idea of raking up the bears ears national monument is a slap in the base to the members of our tribes and an affront to indian people all across the nation." that doesn't sound very happy to me. mr. secretary, you told the committee "sovereignty should

mean something." also said you consulted with tribal nations about your recommendation regarding bears ears, but they all oppose your recommendation. can you explain how your decision respects sovereignty and self-determination? sec. zinke: thank you. i would invite members to go to bears years and look at what it is geared it is 1.5 million acres, roughly 1.5 times the side of glacier national park. ishin the monument, there already a monument. there are national forest, wilderness study areas of 400,000 acres, there is a u.s. and blm land.t my assessment after talking to , ands in washington dc tribes there, -- but also there

is a distinct difference between the u-haul navajo -- utah navajo and arizona navajo which should be respected. there is a commission that represents the utah navajo, which is by an elected official .hat represents her district the monument itself is split on whether tribes agree. i talked to them all. sen. franken: does she have official representation in a tribe? she is elected in her district and represents the district, which is navajo. sen. franken: but does she have representation in the tribe? sec. zinke: she is the only of the utahon navajo in her district, actually where the monument is. so to say she doesn't have a

say, or the tribes that i talked to -- the members of the tribes in utah all have a say. she is not part of the intertribal coalition, which i am not sure why she's not. sen. franken: you said the ," and the "very happy intertribal coalition has said that breaking up the monument is a slap in the face. those seem at odds. sec. zinke: well, i did talk to the tribes. sen. franken: you spoke to the tribes, but you said they were very happy. but we have the bears ears intertribal coalition saying that the radical idea of breaking up the national monument is a slap in the face to the members of our tribes and an affront to indian people across the country.

those seem very at odds. know you probably haven't talked to navajo, but i have. -- sen. franken: no, i haven't. sec. zinke: what they really want is comanagement. in bears ears, there is a little thing called the law saying the smallest areas compatible to protect the object. in the case of the acreage of bears ears, they can be separated, identified, and the borders revised. but i believe it should be so managed, and that is what the tribes want. the franken: i am not sure tribes want that. it seems that the intertribal coalition speaks for what the

tribes want more than you do, and they say that this is a slap in the face. i am sure that the senator from new mexico, senator heinrich may have something to add here. daines. daines: thank you for being here today. again, the significance of your leadership at the department to our great state of montana cannot be overstated. i know very well that you understand the importance of achieving the balance of land-use -- as we say out of montana, the blend of role haggard and john denver, that blend as we look at our public lands. see prioritization of energy development.

lacking,nce has been and you know how much montana for jobs.oil, gas we are sinking as we speak trying to keep schools, teachers, infrastructure funded. i remain highly concerned regarding the proposed reductions in the pilt program. i was just up in columbia falls and we had some county commissioners -- we have counties in montana that have over 90% owned by the federal government, and of course there is no tax base there. trying to help county commissioners struggling -- literally they are reducing staffing on a road crews.

we have county commissioners jumping on graders to plow snow to keep the school buses going, because of the lack of revenue, because we have lost the timber industry on these federal lands. the federal government does not pay taxes, and it's a life blood for these counties out west. we need to improve land management, but in the meantime, we have to provide full funding for the programs to create certainty for the local county budgets. i also want to ask you about some of these cuts to national parks. i know you are a lifelong neighbor to a national park, i am one to yellowstone national park. thek you for prioritizing deferred cyclical maintenance, however, the president's budget cuts to glacier and

yellowstone in operation accounts. i am concerned as we see the national parks receiving record levels of visitation -- i know we are going to be proclaiming the greatof june, outdoors month. predicting a record season. i share your commitment to fully addressing maintenance needs on so public lands, as you clearly articulated in your opening statement. my question is are the work services likely to receive high levels of visitation this year, however the cuts and operations funding help ensure the public has the sort of experience we all expect from what has been idea"?"america's best

sec. zinke: thank you for the question. it is always a pleasure to work with you. includes $397get million for pilt. cannot tell you what the exact amount is going to be, because of the secure rules schools has not been authorized. it will be difficult to estimate until that does, but right now it sits in this budget as a proposed 12% reduction. as it sits, not knowing what is going to happen to the srs, but 397ke last budget, there is in it, which i think is a good start. the parks -- again, i will go to when you lose revenue, it makes

a difference. when half of our parks do not charge, when even the tier system that many parks do not follow, interior gives away foot five point -- five $5.5 billion in grants. make sure weve to fund our core responsibilities. the parks are treasures, but too heavy and middle and upper management. ,o shift those assets forward we intend to do that in working toh you in a organization strengthen our parks. >> thank you. i am out of time. thank you. you.ank

>> thank you, madam chair. secretary zinke. in nevada with over 85% of public lands in these eight, many of our rural communities are reliant upon these lands for revenue, local recreation, economy, livestock raising, and energy development. that is why our relationship with the department of the interior has been so crucial. i appreciate the opportunities you have had to speak with me and look forward to working with you in the future as well including when you come out to take a look. i know you are looking at old butte hasten and arrange. you know my concerns about the executive order and the letter i sent to you, so i want to ask you initially -- i know we have

had discussions about you coming in the fall. when you come out, take into consideration the economic benefits and support before making a decision? sec. zinke: right now, my schedule has me in july coming out to nevada, oregon, and new mexico. in the way i have looked at the -- as it, one, it is a settled, is the community happy with it? that is why i talked to commissioners, tribal leaders, because i think taking in all of the above, is the first time as in regulations.com, the public can have their say. a monument designation by a president is singular. it does not require public

comment, or nepa. but the president has emphasized . >> in the fiscal request for the bureau, it was $1.1 billion. the request proposes cuts for water-smart grants, for use projects. the state of nevada gets the least rainfall of any other state in the nation. we have the mind -- we have to be incredibly mindful of persistent drought conditions. why would the administration oppose cuts for successful programs for nevada and the west to deal with drought? i am curious how you respond to this. secretary zinke: this is what a balanced budget looks like.

reclamation in particular, for a kid who grew $18n the west, there is billion in the water reclamation, and yet we cannot appropriate money on the core infrastructure to support rural water. i would love to work with you on finding a way to not have to go through the stringent appropriation process and streamline it and put money where it belongs on the front line. i think there's about $20 billion in the account in the water reclamation that is for reclamation that has never been appropriate. lwcf is $18 billion in the fund that was intended for a purpose that was never used for that purpose. i would love to work with you and especially on rural water projects.

this is a proposed cut to the bureau of indian 40,000on, serving students. the budget proposes cuts forling $23.3 million programs that provide social services, welfare services, an indian child welfare act protections. how is this budget an example of honoring the federal trust obligation with the tribes, and can you explain how these cuts will in danger these communities or the challenges that these communities will not have? secretary zinke: when it comes to bureau of indian education, i think we have failed. we spend far more money per student and get far less in six i had isis a that we spend about $15,391 per student in the bureau of education compared to the national average of --

more money may not produce a better solution, but i am concerned as well as you are. something is not right. to workingen together to figuring out a better solution, how to do it. i am absolutely committed to making sure every kid has a great education, in particular to some indian nations that are isolated. already challenge with social academic parkers -- pressures. senator: thank you for being here. senator: thank you for being here today. appreciate your service. this past weekend i had the opportunity to visit a fire in colorado, which has not been declared without yet. this is a fire that was burning,

last fall, and there is no active firefighting taking place, that you can will see snow taking place as the trickles into the stumps that are burning. pretty amazing. i thank you for the combined efforts of the blm on this fire. we talked about the role of usgs and the flow gauges they will be looking with local communities on. i encourage that cooperation with locals as they address the flows from fires and how they impact flooding. i mentioned to you the executive order regarding national monuments and the review, 13 792. we wrote you a letter earlier saying the canyons of the ancients national monument, an example of what the antiquities act was intended to do, incorporating the land management of the monument so

communities support the designation. that is what has happened in colorado, so i would urge you to protect this designation in colorado as it stands. is there an update on the canyons of the ancients in colorado? secretary zinke: there is not on our priority review list. let me just say a word, because i think it -- i think bears ears is relevant in this case. what the recognition of bears ears was there was a recognition to resize the boundary to protect the antiquities that are found within it, because it does say smallest area compatible with protection of the object. there are certain authorities the president does not have that we are going to request that congress take a look at. there was lands within bears i'd be more think appropriate to a national recreation area or a national conservation area, because there is no object per se, that

authority resides in congress and not the executive. we also looked about 400,000 ises in the bears ears which wilderness study area. when you put a monument over the top of a wilderness and that monument has its proclamation, you manage it as a wilderness or a proclamation? in some cases a wilderness is held to a stricter and higher standard of what you can and cannot do. a're asking congress to take look at that. in cases across the west, there might be some monuments that have the wilderness or the wilderness study group, so we are asking what the intent of congress, do we manage it has wilderness or a proclamation? , the not have the grant authority for comanagement, and the tribes wanted comanagement. i do not have the authority to grade it.

i appreciate the fact that kenyans of the agent is not on the priority list -- canyons of the ancients is not on the priority this. we talked about moving the headquarters to the western united states, because it makes sense that 99% of public lands under its management west of the mississippi river. toave introduced legislation do that, a strategy involving metrics for moving blm west. the mayor of denver supports the effort. at least made public some -- comments. your goal to move some of your department to the front lines in the west, how can this department help you? secretary zinke: we are looking at doing a reorganization of ing your and we are need help.

the way we are organized currently, the different bureaus report to their different regions. we are looking to moving assets where they should be, and when i say joint, if you have a stream that has a trout and a salmon in the same stream, you are going to probably involve noaa, fish and wildlife, because we are going to look at the lot -- trout, and noaa is going to look at the salmon. if you have a dam, it is probably army corps of engineers. there are four different bureaus. you could actually have four different bureaus that have different priorities, and in order to come up with a plan, you are not going -- the plan will not be reconciled between the bureaus. we are going to look at how to be more joint, and that is putting the assets where the blm, outance of, in

west, so we are looking at reorganizing to do that, to push the assets where they should be. senator: i know i am out of time, but we will have questions to follow up on. thank you, mr. chairman. senator: thank you. in west a couple things virginia that is different than being out west. we are still wild and wonderful. secretary zinke: i consider you out west. : first of all, you have been supportive of coal industries and people who do this tremendous work for the people of this country. i'm confused why the president's budget of 2018 proposes 134 million payments to the united mine workers, from the health

and it plans from the treasury. those are coming from offices, andace mining reclamation, enforcement. that is a $45 million reduction from the 2016, and i do not know -- we just passed a piece of legislation to put 22,000 miners in a 1993 fund. we are going to be in serious problems because that aml distribution for moneys and the treasury -- i do not know if you look at that, what challenges that might cause for you. secretary zinke: we did, sir, point,s is a starting and chairman rogers on the house focused on- very this issue. i look forward to working with you on it. i understand the rub. senator: you see the concerns we

have? secretary zinke: and i have long respected chairman rogers. if you will work on matt and make sure that our miners do not get shortchanged -- let me go about something about national force. nation's 50% of our forests are privately owned, but 90% of the timber comes from that 50%. that means the remainder of the properties we had in national , about 10%blic lands comes from them. why are we not able to harvest or look at harvesting financially, especially because -- andlooming -- losing strikes by lightning. i think he could do a better job at managing our forests, also protecting the forests, but having the revenue that comes from it.

just 3% comes from national forests in west virginia. that provides jobs. secretary zinke: i could not agree with you more, sir. it has been an area of frustration before i was in congress. the force service alone has about 71 million acres of dead and dying timber that should be removed. we spend billions of dollars each year fighting force fires, and yet we cannot harvest trees. a small percentage is actually available for timber harvest because it is locked up theer have it, -- habitat, spotted owl, or different plan to god so our forward on a sustainable basis, we are going to the help legislatively to work through it. there is a case where watching to the that will go ninth circuit that looks at the different balances between legislative intent on

habitat, andield, other things. we are looking at it, and my commitment is to make sure we have a healthy forest, and a healthy forest is making sure we are at sustainable or as closely as we -- as close as we can -- do people defy: the accuracy or logic of this, that do not want anything touched -- and these are pristine areas, but if i am going to preserve a pristine area, i am going to make sure we allow it to flourish and grow. and dying timber does absolutely the apps -- opposite. acretary zinke: we live in great nation of a lot of opinions, and there are some that believe in the theory of natural regulation or man is an footprint,d lightest and are content with watching our forests burned down.

uses in a model that science and multiple use for most of our holdings, includes timber harvest. you have to do it right, and there have been mistakes in the past, but we know great people who know how to harvest timber. senator manchin: aml, the funds we are using for that perverse, that was for revitalizing some areas that lost so much. and the president's budget proposes eliminating the mined a program. i hope you would look at that, sir, before you make that step because these communities have given so much to this great country need a little bit of assistance to get back on their feet. that would be very harmful to them. secretary zinke: my commitment is to work with you on that, and chairman rogers also talked to me point blank on that. i respect him.

i respect jobs, i respect hard-working people, and whether it is coal or logging or just people putting things together, manufacturing industry, i come from three generations of plumbers. : great to be with you again. great to see you. i was singing your praises along with another senator's as well as our friend brian glanced at boise state and girls state in wyoming in the past week because there you were, three young high school students from montana sitting together at boys state. that is the aspiration of people in boys state, girl stay, can look to you. secretary zinke: i was a slacker of the three.

senator you and i have spoken in the past about the bureau of land entrant in the backlog of applications of permits to drill for oil and gas on federal land. we discussed permitting delays. they vary. some offices are having much more substituent backlogs than others. permitting delays threaten our energy security, american jobs, and economic stability in small communities. the legit proposal includes a $16 million increase for the blm program that is responsible for processing will and gastrin permits. budget proposal states is funny blmease will hope -- help have sufficient capacity to process applications for permits to drill. i'm encouraged by your proposal. the ellen needs to have the resources at its disposal to process oil and gas permits an economy matter, and we must make sure it allocates resources to field offices greatest in need,

certainly the one we have in casper, wyoming. so the steps you are going to take to make sure the blm offices have the resources they need to relieve these significant backlogs of permits for application? backlog isinke: the two-pronged. what is resources, but also the process. sure the process is fair and not arbitrary and hold people accountable. loops can go in these where you cannot give an answer for 18 months, two years you do not have any chance to actually talk to the individual that is doing it, or it cannot -- or it can be pigeonholed, that is a problem. you should have a feeling whether that permit is going to be authorized or not or whether it can be mitigated. and lots of it is restoring trust in our system that we are going to do what the public

expects us to do, to do a review. the review should be straightforward, verified, a sure the permit process is not arbitrary, and we should work with people and be more of a partner than an adversary. that is a tall order. government or a lot of the folks out there, whether owners, or private land do not trust the department of interior. backmber one job is to get there and talk to committees and the and advocate and restore trust. senator: the department is billion-dollar issues that will require management into the future the on the fiscal years. issues like wildhorse, borough management -- burro management. deferred maintenance costs. solveds not going to be

overnight, and this is not a proposal -- this is a proposal for one year you are talking about today. to what extent are you examining the needs and the issues that will require multitier planning, like the national parks services deferred maintenance backlog? secretary zinke: we are looking at long-term funding. $15.5 billion a year. we do not go up and down. we want a steady stream, and there are opportunities on commit, new revenue to against a stable platform of maintenance repair in the out years. it was mentioned earlier we have 330 million visitors through our parks a celestial. we think that will increase. we have to look at the public lands around our parks to make sure things like the trail is disconnect, watersheds makes sense, and those are going to

take resources to do that and have a steady fund of resources coming to put against our infrastructure is part of it. long-termking to fixes, and that will be part of the infrastructure bill. senator: the final question refers to the bureau of indian education. comments -- you made earlier, that we have failed, something is not right, i'm into making sure the education process is there. as you go forward, i hope you continue to work closely with tribes, with the bureau of indian education, and congress to make sure the money is used most effectively, because as you say, there is a lot of room for improvement. secretary zinke: one comment about indian education. it is different. you have dorms you have security so that funding mechanism. so to say it is more expensive is a little bit this evening in that it is not the same as a public school in some cases.

but it is certainly a priority of mine to make sure the education experience and the opportunity for a child is elevated, highlighted, and prioritized,, but it will take both of us working together and giving more flexible the upfront to the tribes so they can look at their issue and cater a more fox approach. senator: secretary zinke, you and i talked about a planned that sportsmen in new mexico have promoted to provide public access to the only legally inaccessible wilderness area in the entire nation. for the very first time this year, we have the potential to have access to that area. since 2009 when the wilderness wa designated an long before then when it was a wilderness study area, syria has been

closed to the public know legal ingress. we have an opportunity to change ist an agreement that literally sitting in your lap in time for this year's hunting season. i have heard from local sportsmen's groups as well as the san miguel county commission in support of this land, and i'm getting calls each and every day from folks wondering when a decision will be final. i have letters here from hunters , southwest consolidated sportsmen, the local chapter of sportsmen's concerned, the watergate federation and the san miguel county commission. we are finally at the finish line in an effort that is -- has taken well over a decade. can i tell him new mexicans they can look forward to hunting in the wilderness this year? secretary zinke: you and i

talked about it. the proposal was -- and we both agree, having access, the interior would strongly taking -- consider taking in public land. -- it iss of the land a donation, but it does not meet the standard of what a wilderness typically is. and i will work with you. this is a unique opportunity. we agree we should have public access. i think where the robin is is we take it in as wilderness or we take it in as something that provides a little more access, as wilderness does not include a bike or a mountain bike or a vehicle -- senator: the challenge is there is no place to bike to.

the donation was made contingent to the land being added to the existing wilderness. i've spoken to the land owner and they are not willing to make a donation under separate terms from that. let's be clear, if you do not accept the donation, the reality one,'re back to square where we were before with zero public access for hunting, zero public access for recreation. there is no plan b for this. as somebody who actually went out and tried to find easements that we could purchase in this area for over 10 years, there is no alternative. it is either we get access for the first time or we go back to the only landlocked wilderness in the united states, and that is clearly not what my constituents desire. secretary zinke: i do not yield to pressure, only higher principle, and when someone comes to the table saying we are only going to give you this donation only -- only under

these conditions and terms, that does not sound right me -- to me like a negotiation -- senator: they did negotiate this. at the time, the blm was open to negotiate this. secretary zinke: we are open to negotiating, so we have public access. if they are willing to work with us to make sure that the public has access to it, than i am sure we can come to an amenable solution. to come to the table is -- senator: right now we do not have public access. zero. by looking a gift horse in the mouth, we are turning back the clock to where we were before. i can tell you, if this does not get done by this fall, i can just tell you there will be an awful lot of people disappointed in northeastern new mexico who sought this was a slamdunk where

you had the county commission, the local groups on board, the delegation on board. -- this is one of those few cases where everybody lines up on the same side and says this is good for the community and we can grow our economy with this, let's do it. secretary zinke: i world -- i will work with you on it, but find public access. is it your definition of public access? is it you can walk through the wilderness, or is it public access where it provides a minute 90's like a parking lot for people that are maybe disabled or cannot walk? senator: it is easy enough to provide a parking lot, but you are not going to provide nice access to the area that is designated as wilderness. i am all for additional access for mountain bikes, but this is the place. have you been there?

the canyon walls go straight up on either side. there's no place to go to unless you are willing to put a pack on, and it is worthwhile then, because there are big mule deer, l, the best habitat in northern mexico, and right now i know there is zero, 0, 0 public access. secretary zinke: we agree we should we should move forward on public access. senator king: before the witness, a couple of comments. i want to join -- invite senator cassidy joined the caucus and i want to use his charts. i know that in louisiana part of the problem is subsidence. also, we are going to have to change the name of that park to the park for morally -- formerly known as glacier. there were hundred 50 glaciers

when the park was founded. that is accelerating. got to take cognizance of what is happening in our national parks as one of the canary in the coal mine, and glacier is one of the most prominent. , first, i am not going to lobby you. i want to thank you for visiting our beautiful catoctin -- katahdin national monument. i want to thank you for going, sincerely. i once went on a congressional trip, and an old man in a foreign country said, i know why you're here. because one day of seeing is better than 30 days of reading. and you went to see, and i deeply appreciate your committing -- you made a commitment to me, to go to maine, and i am delighted you did that.

i want to thank you for that. secretary zinke: it was a wonderful experience, and i am sure you are going to be enthusiastic about the recommendation. senator king: that is as much as i can ask. as well as the: governor. i talk to the governor, so i think we have a reasonable approach and recommendation that all parties will be satisfied with. senator king: i congratulate with you and look forward to the recommendation. in terms of the cuts to the national park, any people have talked about it. you mentioned a substantial part of the cuts will take place in regional -- in the bureaucracy, if you will, as opposed to the individual parks. are there cuts at individual parks that will hit the operating budgets? secretary zinke: on the reorganization, again, what i see is the front line, the specific parks are too short. in the case of the monument in

maine, there's only one superintendent there. and you can add one superintendent plus a detail person. you go up there, and clearly the withstructure required, bathrooms, signs him working together with the state, when you incorporate something under a public trust, be at a park service or a monument, there's an obligation on our side to make sure it is done right. bears ears, in that conversation, there's no doubt some antiquities there that are well-deserving of federal protection, but what i do not see is i do not see any signs, i do not see bathrooms at the trailhead, i do not see any parking lots. i saw case, in escalante, a german van with three germans and it, with kayaks, looking for the great staircases. -- thereno state case

iscase there. if we are going to assume the primary responsibility of preserving something, we also have to assume the responsibility to make sure we preserve it. and that is infrastructure, signage, monitoring that is necessary to do that. senator king: in the individual parks, whether yellowstone or olympia or acadia in maine, do you anticipate operational cuts, or are you talking about simply administration cuts? secretary zinke: individually, very doubtful. what i have done in the a hiringers as far as freeze, i maintain it in washington and maintain it in denver, so we could push bodies where they can belong out in the front. you will see a movement to make sure we sure up and expand --

shore up and expand the front line. the regional scientists, they are all with the usgs. what we are looking at is how to return the scientists back out to the field where they do more fieldwork rather than headquarters work. there are some minor adjustments in the budget that i think as we go through the process and coordinate with you on reorganization, what our goal is is to make sure the parks not more accessbut give to the front line and reduce the middle and upper management. we are talking about more to less tail. i do not object to that. final comment. one of the items in the budget or in the plant is a suspension of the advisory commissions to the national parks, and they are

under review. i cannot speak for other parts -- parks. i can tell you the advisory commission at a katie in maine is great. they are volunteer members. they involve administrative costs, that this is a case where the value to the park system in terms of good relations with its neighbors outweighs the fairly minor savings from the administrative costs associated. you from personal experience the value of the advisory commissions. secretary zinke: i have 220 which i was surprised at the number. this is what i asked. rather than go individual advisory groups, i suspended them all with this caveat -- tell me who is on your board, tell me what you have done in the last or, tell me what you have done in the last five years, coming what your budget is, and tell me what your goal is written if you had an issue, they can ask for an exemption to as acadia, they

did not request an exemption yet. but it was really about two pages maximum. now i am responsible for these 220 boards to a degree. i just want to know. i would think the overwhelming numbers of boards do great things, and it was an opportunity to me to know who was on the board, look through what their goals are, which i think it is important, edified questions, i could ask for it but i assume we will have all the paperwork on those boards. acadia was meeting. i understand they want to meet in the summer. all they have to do is put in a request for an exception. senator king: it sounds like the national park version of trust but verify. secretary zinke: i just want to know. we spend about $15 million, which on the scale of the overall budget, not much, but if you are a plumber, $50 million

is a lot of money. the taxpayer's dollars, i want to know what great things the boards are doing, was on the board, what they have done the last five years, and then i will be glad to write him a card and thank or their service and invite them to d.c. and talk to them. thank you. senator: i appreciate you bringing up that question. i have heard from folks back home. we have heard from a couple advisory committees that are pretty important. 1002 area.s the there are two groups under the working group and the citizens subsistenceel -- advisory panel. hearing your explanation about what your intent was and just conducting this review and how

is their work at is underway, there is an opportunity for ande groups to be up running and doing the work that i think we all recognize is important. oversight is always appreciated around here. let me go back to another issue relating to land conveyances. inventorynducted an req last yearuest looking into the contaminated lands that have been conveyed to alaska native corporations and additional contamination that had been on conveyances. sites, anddentified the ownership is a mixed bag here. what we know is these sites are contaminated. they need remediation.

the federal government is moving very slowly, and part of the aoblem is we do not have single agency that is overseeing and coordinating the cleanups. so you have a situation where you have lands that are formerly dod, and everybody's point the finger, saying, you be in charge. and as a consequence, it is not happening. discussions had with them. they say they cannot compel federal agencies to clean up these contaminated sites. it seems to me that because of doi's trust responsibility to alaska natives, it seems that at a minimum we are to be able to get interior to coordinate a working group of these responsible agencies so we can get the cleanup started on 600 sites. this is a different issue than a

legacy cleanup, which you have been briefed on up north. we are trying to cut through that backlog as well. when using about the situation right now, you have alaska natives that not had the filled, you have not had commitments to alaska native veterans fulfilled, and on lands where they received conveyances, they get contaminated lands. it is not a good deal. it is not right. i would ask if you can have your team go back the what they cannot do to work with us on how we can address this issue of contaminated lands. maybe we need to look at whether interior could allow anc's to trade back contaminated lands new cleanions of lands. i need to make some progress on this, and i am asking for your assistance on it. secretary zinke: the good news,

at least on the alaskan legacy wells, as we are down 31 as opposed to 50. we will be at 25 wells in legacy. i share your frustration, and this is why we are looking at a reorganization based on a joint model of combatant commands, because you are absolutely correct that the different bureaus within the government agencies, whether ag or interior or army corps of engineers do not work very well, and you cannot task each other without andg through the secretary we have created a bureaucracy where we cannot get anything done. we are looking at -- and alaska is going to a joint model, joint management, everyone reports to their headquarters. same way we fight forest fires, similar to how we fight

combatant commanders, and make -- we think that model is appropriate when we are looking s, wildlife corridor cleanups, and these trends that isolate one bureau but are more thai bureau, joined in this case -- we think that model is more appropriate. we are going to need to work with you to make that happen. most of the authority relies in the secretary, but there is something's as we go through. no doubt we want to work with you anyway on us, but we are going to need your help in order to bring the ball up the field. so much ofrkowski: this is interagency coordination. it is frustrating when you have one agency porting the finger at another one saying you do it first. we do to work with you on it. let me turn to senator franken. senator franken: thank you. first set of, my

questions was about tribal affairs. of i have heard a great deal concern from tribal leaders about the role that james kazen at the department of interior is playing. during his time at the department of interior, during the bush administration, he earned a reputation for his obligation is -- opposition to putting lands in trust. and now i'm hurrying -- hearing of land decisions made at the previous secretary level will now be made by mr. kazen. hasve heard that mr. kazen delegated a great deal of decisions that are within the secretary's purview. what is the scope of mr. kazen at the department? does it include putting land in the trust? to date, i doe:

not have my deputy. of all the senate-confirm and it -- individuals, i do not have my deputy. i have about 70 appointments, 20 or so senate confirmed come and to date, i have no senate confirms. i have magnificent candidates, but they are not in the office . mr. kazen is my acting deputy at the money. it comes from his experience in the bush administration on it. as you know, i think it was january 19 when i probably had an interior aid for nine decisions based on trust coming in. iserminations of whether it appropriate to trick -- to take trusted. i would love to get a stable platform -- : i am hearingn

this from leadership across the administration in terms of shortage of deputies, etc. about want to ask you your statements on the president's budget and whether they reflect a commitment to strengthen tribal cyber the and support self-determination. $371 million from the bureau of indian affairs. on thef us who are indian affairs committee just know how woefully underfunded an indian country is. insult insult -- this ad insult to injury.

how do these cuts support self-determination and how do you get trust when you present a budget like this? secretary zinke: this is what a balanced budget looks like we could ignore it. there are other with -- senator franken: there are other ways of balancing ledges. on the backs of the tribes is not a way to do it. secretary zinke: some of the cuts that were 8%, 11%, but this is what a balanced budget looks like. you --ortunate thing is the fortunate thing is you have a say on it. -- but in order to present a balanced budget -- you, andranken: i hear i am not going to argue with you. i'm going to change quickly to climate change. at a hearing last week, you had an exchange on climate change with my minnesota colleague. you talked about glacial retreat

in glacier national park, -- saying the glacier started melting right after the end of the last ice age. that is true, but you continued, it has been a consistent melt. data released last month by the u.s. geological survey, who works for you, show glaciers in the park have reduced by 30% -- 40% in the last 50 years. we are not seeing a consistent melts, where melt is dramatically accelerating. our secretary of the interior who is in charge of our nation's public lands is unclear. i'm concerned about whether you are clear about the magnitude of warming that is occurring.

backing-out of the paris agreement -- i know i'm running out of time -- can you tell me how much warming government scientists at it for the end of this century under a business as usual scenario? secretary zinke: the paris president andhe my judgment, it was about a bad deal. we spent three dollars billion -- $3 billion -- senator franken: can you tell me how much government scientists predict under a business as usual scenario question mark -- question mark -- ? you said we have to go with the science. that is what you said during the early part of this hearing. you said we have to go with the

science. and there is agreement among climate scientists about the range of what we would have in warming by the end of the century. you know what that ranges? secretary zinke: if everyone adhered to the paris climate accord, that change would be degrees, which is insignificant. and yet people ignore -- no, no. franken: no, on, secretary zinke: that was an m.i.t. study. was whatranken that the change would be under the time covered by the agreement. that is not what the change would be by the end of the century if they continue to it. you are mixing apples and oranges. i want you to answer the question that i asked you. that is all i want you to do. can you tell me how much warming government scientists, working for a government, predict for

the end of the century under a business as usual scenario? secretary zinke: can you tell me whether china increased its co2 between now and 230 on the agreement, and by what question mark i will be glad to give you that answer. senator frank in: and that answer is -- secretary zinke: i will give that to you in writing. you said a number of each times in response to our questions that this budget is what a balanced budget looks like. balance thisget resource attrition -- extraction with conservation? secretary zinke: the budget balances fiscally in a 10-year program -- program.

program does not favor extraction over non-extraction. it is a legit that produces a stewardship that -- it is a budget that produces stewardship for our public lands. senator: one of the ways you beld increase revenues would front resource extraction. it appears from a pragmatic standpoint that is one of the ways you are going to create additional funds to keep the interior department going. i would say if we look at this budget, it probably reflects bent toward resources extraction over conservation. an example -- when you were here for your confirmation hearing, you were a big supporter, when i met with you, also, prior to that hearing him of the land and

water conservation fund. that fund is supposed to be a conservation program that is -drilling revenues, and yet this fund is cut by 84%. that is an example of how we are moving toward extraction as .pposed to conservation the reason i am particularly interested in the strength of the land and water conservation fund is it is a bipartisan supported fund, and hawaii has submitted a proposal that obtains funding from the lwcf, and our proposal is called island forests at risk. it protects water resources, etc. has your commitment to the lwcf changed, because this fund is cut by 84% in the budget, which you support? secretary zinke: it is funny. lwcf is offshore

oil and gas. the more we jail, the more we fund. what is more cut from the budget is land acquisition in the lw cf. the fund itself has about $18 billion over the period of time that has not been appropriate. we are supportive of looking at onshore.nsion of some of that is to provide some infrastructure relief. it is hard to fathom how you you cannotland in if afford to maintain it. i think we should look at ways to maintain it. when we have our conservation easements and all the good things that land and water conservation fund has provided, we can make sure we have a revenue stream to make sure we can maintain those holdings.

in a case, it is for the acquisition of properties that the private landowners -- because we do not have any national forests in hawaii. we are one of 10 states that do not. we rely on other resources from the federal government to support the forest areas. so there are private entities that have been waiting for years, and finally got into the pipeline for support from the lwcf, and suddenly that pipeline has been closed. i would like to understand that i conclude that you do support the president's budget for interior at this point with all the cuts that many of my colleagues have pointed out. secretary zinke: i do support the budget, and i commend the having --for actually having the focus on providing the first up -- first step of what it balance budget looks like. like.anced budget looks

that is a tremendous change from the proposition that having a judge that does not balance, that does not matter. if nothing else, it provides a good conversation -- editor: i am running out of -- senator: i am running out of time, but the balanced budget is in the eye of the beholder. did you push back on it it cuts that are reflected on the budget of the interior? secretary zinke: there was certain areas in the budget that i think should be greater prioritized and not -- lwcf, been a supporter of although the sources offshore oil and gas. i think our parks are a treasure. but what surprised me when you become the secretary and open up the budget is how much revenue we lost. that is a concern to me, because revenue can pay for a lot of

things. and if you have money in the bank, then they love these problems and programs and things and the hardship does not have to occur. the other thing that is interesting, is where we spend our money. $5.5 billion with grants. most of the grants are absolutely appropriate and good. looking at it, a lot of money was going outside of other things while our infrastructure was hurting. personnel wise, we have good people in the department of interior. but we are really heavy on the upper bureaucracy. we have about 6500 people in d.c. senator: yes, you mentioned that, and i'm interested if there any programs you perspective. it sends that sounds like lannett conversation -- -- it stands -- it sounds like land

conversation was something you were for. senator: i am always struck with senator king's measured demeanor, and he said something that stuck with me when he was having a conversation with you today. he said one day of seeing is often better than 30 days of reading. i ran back to the office, and i will leave this matter with you. it gives the impression of that region. it shows how the nation property is just the existing wilderness. that right now is in a sea of public -- private line and that is why public access is not possible. is my understanding there is an outside the wilderness boundary location where the local blm and the local advocates have hoped to create a parking lot for

access into the entire canyon system. but i thought given that you said while i was off at a vote that you were coming out to new what might help for both of us is to see it on the ground. so i wanted to extend that invitation and see if you might be interested in seeing the location on the ground so we can have a common place to start in terms of where this goes. secretary zinke: i would be honored to accept your invitation. i will be out there. one good thing about this job is you see a lot of beautiful country and meet a lot of great people. i will commit to work with you on it. that is very much appreciated. the first time i went there was on horseback. there was something about that mode of transit.

i wanted to go back for a moment to bears ears. you said people should see for themselves, and i can thoroughly concur with that. i was in bears ears a few weeks ago with my family over spring break. i used to have an outfitter guy permit in that area through the blm when i was running educational outdoor explanations. you said we have to follow -- expeditions. you said we have to follow the law. i'm curious, as part of your process you have mapped out the locations of the antiquities and the object that were in that proclamation over the landscape of the current boundaries so as to know how and where it might be adjusted. secretary zinke: we are in the process of doing that. it is obviously high density, ones that are easily recognizable, ones that are not. so are -- so we are working to

go through it. the recommendation was this -- we think the antiquities can be identified, segregated, and the borders can be revised. your point, i know you are very appreciative and supportive of our wildernesses. what happens when you put a proclamation with those proclamations of management over the top of the wilderness? because wilderness in some cases can be more stringent in its management than a proclamation. there are areas within a four service or a u.s. forest in their -- there. bearsr: literally, also areas that are better suited. the request was this -- the request to examine the territory of the areas within the to see if they are more appropriate with a national recreation area or a national conservation area.

it is difficult to identify an object in those areas. i am not trying to cut you off. i'm short on time. i would point to the exact -- bandelier.tulare -- it certainly can be done. i am concerned about not looking at the antiquities act just for the antiquities as objects, but teddy roosevelt was clear when whereated mount olympus, the object to be protected was a scientific object. it was the roosevelt elk. and this proclamation is very clear in calling out the elk and the mueller here and the -- mule deer and the decor and she. i hope we can make sure we take a look at those as well as the cultural antiquities which are -- >>